NATION'S HAZY DRUG LAWS NEED DOSE OF COMMON SENSE

Drink and drive and it's grrrrrrrr-eat! Smoke pot and your flakes
are frosted, dude.

So seems the message from Kellogg's, which has decided not to renew
its sponsorship contract with Michael Phelps after the star of the
Summer Olympics was photographed smoking marijuana at a party in
South Carolina.

That's showbiz, of course, but the cereal and munchie company had no
problem signing Phelps despite a prior alcohol-related arrest. In
2004, Phelps was fined and sentenced to 18 months probation and
community service after pleading guilty to driving while impaired.

The silliness of our laws -- and the hypocrisy of our selective
attitudes toward mood enhancers -- needs no further elaboration.
Even so, things are getting sillier by the minute.

Richland County (S.C.) Sheriff Leon Lott has now made eight
pot-related arrests based on the snap that shot around the world.
Seven were for possession and one for distribution, after deputies
used warrants to enter the house where Phelps allegedly was photographed.

Phelps may be next.

In an earlier column, I gave Lott the benefit of the doubt,
suggesting that his hands were tied given the laws of the land and
South Carolina's political climate. I retract the benefit.

Sheriffs, though elected and therefore political, have great
latitude as to what crimes they pursue. In a state that recently
ranked among the most dangerous in the nation, one would think South
Carolina's law enforcement officials have better things to do.

Indeed, they do. In our peculiar obsession to track down the Willie
Nelsons, Rush Limbaughs, and now Michael Phelpses of society --
nonviolent, victimless imbibers of drugs -- we've actually made
society less safe. That's the conclusion of 10,000 cops,
prosecutors, judges and others who make up the membership of Law
Enforcement Against Prohibition.

Howard Wooldridge, LEAP's Washington representative, is a former cop
and detective who lectures civic clubs and congressional staffers on
the futility of drug laws that reduce public safety by wasting time
and money. He points to child pornography as one example.

As of last April, he says, law enforcement had identified 623,000
computers containing child pornography, including downloadable video
of child rape. Only a fraction have been pursued with search
warrants, thanks to limited resources and staff shortages.

Another example: Last year Human Rights Watch reported that as many
as 400,000 rape kits containing evidence were sitting unopened in
criminal labs and storage facilities. Between the Los Angeles Police
Department and the L.A. County Sheriff's Department , nearly 12,000
kits were unopened, according to an NPR report in December.

Arguments against prohibition should be obvious. When you eliminate
the victimless "crime" of drug use, you disempower the criminal
element. Neutering drug gangs and cartels would be no small
byproduct of decriminalization. Not only would state
regulation minimize toxic concoctions common on the black
market, but also taxation would be a windfall in a hurting economy.

No one's saying that drugs aren't dangerous. Alcohol and tobacco are
also dangerous.

And no one thinks children should have access to harmful substances,
though they already do. Parents who recoil because their child
became an addict should note that prohibition didn't help. What
prohibition did was criminalize what is essentially a health problem
- -- and overcrowd prisons. In 2007, there were 872,720 marijuana
arrests in the U.S. Of those, 775,137 were for possession. South
Carolina just added eight to this year's roster.

The greatest obstacle to drug law reform is public fear and
politics, says Wooldridge. "I've had staffers tell me that to even
call a hearing will get you un-elected."

Which, perhaps, explains why Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., has tackled the
drug problem through the issue of prison overcrowding. Webb has held
two hearings before the Joint Economic Committee on U.S. drug policy
and incarceration costs. This year, he has promised to push for a
blue-ribbon commission to study why the U.S. has more people in jail
than any other country.

The answer -- and the solution -- seems clear. I'm not convinced
that all drugs should be legalized, but we should at least put
prohibition on the table to take another look. In the meantime, Lott
has some explainin' to do.